Sage Journals open access through October
For those of you with a research bent (which seems to be weak in the revitalization blog world...), Sage Publications has open access to its journals through the end of the month.
I wish I would have noticed earlier in the month!
Some of their publications include:
- International Regional Science Review
- Journal of Urban History
- Journal of Planning Education
- Journal of Planning History
- Journal of Planning Literature
- Planning Theory
- Tourist Studies
- Urban Affairs Review
- Urban Studies (UK)
to name a few.
Labels: land use planning, transportation planning, urban history
posted by Richard Layman @ 2:37 PM&Permanent Link
3 Comments:
All good points.
I think we can all agree that some cameras can help with stated safety goals. But when you've got a system where something like 30% of the revenue are coming from 3 cameras located on NY Avenue, 295 near the beltway, and an interstate grade exit near RFK pedestrian safety is NOT the goal anymore.
In terms of metropolitan expansion for whatever reason that isn't going to happen. I've made the point on GGW that the real corruption in local government isn't bribes, but the multiplicity and division of services. Chicago is a great example. Hypothecated taxes and special taxing districts are a great way to get there. Perhaps Illinois financial woes -- the state is nearly bankrupt -- will force some rational consolidation.
(For example, there is no need for Arlington to have a police and fire department; DC could easily run them. In fact, Arlington some city services for Falls Church)
(And the same is doubly true in health care)
(And why, in the most recent proposal we should just be dumping the camera revenue into general fund, not into a special fund)
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/jobs-and-economy/2012/10/why-all-those-new-fees-your-city-charging-are-likely-permanent/3595/
http://www.economist.com/node/16379740
1. I don't disagree at all that the camera system is being misused, based on the generation of revenue from a handful of locations.
2. Sadly, we're not likely to get cross-state service provision. I do remember back in the day of the control board people suggesting DC contract out DMV services to MD or VA.
As you probably remember, I have been suggesting for years that DC jointly provide comm. college programs with either or both MoCo and PG.
I have made the same point for years wrt health care and PG's hospital finance problems and DC's Greater Southeast/now United Medical Center problems.
And the need for metropolitan wide service provision, planning, and funding.
But yes, it ain't gonna happen.
3. The reason for special taxing districts is complicated. While it is an opp. for graft and is why probably it gets support from certain officials, at the same time residents feel better about having a dedicated service with funding stream. E.g., that the other politicos won't f* up parks, because there's a special parks district. Etc.
Thanks so much for the site, I found a lot of useful information for us.
Post a Comment
<< Home